This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Mozes, B. Articles by Shabtai, E. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Mozes, B. Articles by Shabtai, E. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Comparing Medical Centers Treating Hip Fractures in the Elderly: The Importance of Multi-Outcome Measurements

Center for the Study of Clinical Reasoning, The Gertner Institute for Epidemiology and Health Policy Research, Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Israel, benjamin{at}post.tau.ac.il

Y. Maor, MD

Center for the Study of Clinical Reasoning, The Gertner Institute for Epidemiology and Health Policy Research, Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Israel

L. Olmer, MSc

Center for the Study of Clinical Reasoning, The Gertner Institute for Epidemiology and Health Policy Research, Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Israel

E. Shabtai, MSc

Center for the Study of Clinical Reasoning, The Gertner Institute for Epidemiology and Health Policy Research, Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Israel

The objective of this study was to assess the merit of multi-outcome measurements on the evaluation of quality of care, comparing different health care providers. We performed a cross-sectional study in 3 medical centers. Three hundred three patients undergoing surgical repair of traumatic femoral neck fracture were included. Trained nurses gathered data by patient and proxy interview and by chart abstraction. Multivariate analysis was performed to obtain an explanatory model for each outcome. Then, the additional contribution of each of the centers to the explanatory power of the model was examined. The outcomes were mortality, functional capacity, post-operative complications, and length of stay. Explanatory variables included were sociodemographic details, comorbidity indices, preoperative functional capacity, depression, and cognition. The results demonstrated that center A was a "good" outlier for mortality rate but, in contrast, was a "bad" outlier for complication rate and length of stay. Center B was a "bad" outlier for functional capacity but a "good" outlier for length of stay. We conclude that outcome studies for quality assurance programs should include all relevant outcomes, as the assumption that one major outcome may be representative for quality of care assessment may be misleading.

American Journal of Medical Quality, Vol. 14, No. 3, 117-123 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/106286069901400303


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?